a painful reminder of the recent past of europe. a meeting of the current generation of russian and polish leaders, with a hope for a peaceful future. they welcome the strengthening of the russian and polish relationship. moving to the middle east, we are concerned about the arrest of the egyptians under government law. the government of egypt must allow them to have their political views and make certain of due process of law. .

>> we are continuing to monitor the circumstances.

we will anticipate this question, as we look into the loss of life and we are able to confirm that. we will be continuing through the ambassador and we will continue to talk to the government as well. the transit center is functioning normally right now. we have put out a message regarding our own personnel. >> what does this message say right now. >> this expresses concern for the demonstrations.

the message is to reach out to the american community. >> this is the neighborhood of the embassy. >> we do not have this kind of clarity. >> what is this based on? >> we have no indication that the government has ceased to function. obviously, this situation is difficult. there were claims that the government has fallen. we do not have this information. >> do you expect they will diminish any of your operations here? >> this is an important

facility for the relations in afghanistan. >> can you talk about the status of the embassy? how is this going to be functioning. >> right now, the embassy is functioning normally. this will depend largely on the situation outside. >> also, -- can you talk about how we are in touch with the government? on what level? is this the president? is this the kind of contract that we have? >> i cannot say. i have relatively little information. the foreign minister -- we are

expecting to hold bilateral conversations with them tomorrow, to postpone this. i expect that we will have some meetings in washington. they are literally still in the air, coming. >> annual turn them around? >> this is a fair question. we will have meetings with them. we are going to have an extensive, bilateral consultation and i do not have any information. this is involving the assistant secretary. i think that we will use this opportunity to consult with them on a lot of other situations.

>> this is the son of the president. >> his question is, he has left the castle. this sounds like chaos. how can you be sure they are in control? >> not withstanding intrusion into i-- this area. i am in touch with the government. we have worked with them and we see that the government has fallen.

>> the u.s. is not supporting the opposition. they have taken this into their own hands. the government. as we have outlined in various reports, we have intimidation by the government, we want to see them of all, just as the other countries in the other regions. we are working closely with this government, and we are allies with this government. the support for the international operations. we see this in afghanistan. we added to file with their concerns that the people -- we identify with the concerns about their future. this is a matter for peaceful dialogue.

>> he says that there is going to be one ambassador meeting tomorrow. the chinese will be attending. .

.

to support the goals that he's laid out from his inaugural speech today. we are working with the government, generating economic growth, delivering effective governance for the afghan people. to the extent that we have differences with president karzai, we will work through

that constructively and in the spirit of long-term partnership reestablished. >> what about whether or not to cancel the may visit? >> the visit is still on. there's been no change. >> on television one of his people made accusations. is there any reason to believe that president karzai is hiding out in the basement doing something terrible? [laughter] >> he is the president of afghanistan. he has been significantly engage with us on a regular basis. the secretary spoke with him on friday. ambassador aiken barry spoke with him on friday. he was with them on the weekend. we have no information to support the charges that peter galbraith has leveled.

>> you said that you have [unintelligible] he says that if you don't listen to him, he will join the taliban. >> i have not seen a particular transcript of president karzai saying that. i will leave a description of that to the president. as i just said a moment ago, this is a share a struggle. we have vital interests in the region. that is why we are there. that is why we are spending significant resources, both in terms of the lives of our soldiers and the investment we are making in afghanistan. eventually, we want to, working with a tennis fan, to secure afghanistan, help it develop, then turn over responsibility to the afghan government.

along the way, will we see eye to eye on every step, no, we don't. where we have concerns, we will respect fully engaged the president and others and worked in the spirit of respect for partnership. >> what does he have in mind? also, are you in touch with your nato allies? >> we are in touch with our nato allies every day. we have these same strategic goals, objectives as the afghan government does. we want to see it take the lead, but we recognize that afghanistan tragically is one of the poorest countries on earth

and for a time afghanistan is going to need all the help the u.s. and international community can provide. in doing that, there is tension over how to do that best. we'll return with the afghan central government. we are working to develop a more effective government at the local level. we will continue to do that. we value our partnership. we have bumps in the road, we will manage them. >> what issues do you have with the karzai government? >> probably in some cases it is not so much -- it is the pace. we want to see the afghan government emerged, take a more aggressive leadership role. we are working to build up capacity within specific

ministries. in doing so, accountability will be very important to us. make sure that the resources we provide are effectively spent. that does create tension in doing so, but we have our own interests there. not in all cases will the be identical to afghan interests. we are a foreign power on afghans the soil. that is something that can create issues on the ground. we will work through those as we go forward. >> apart from the drug allegations, he spoke about the president being flighty, perhaps is a nice word for it. does the u.s. government have concerns about karzai's stability, his mental state, or

behavior as late? >> none. >> so everything that has been said in the white house about his behavior is without merit? >> there were questions the world had about some of our leaders in the recent past. let me -- [laughter] as we have said for a couple of days, we have concerns about some of the things he has said. just as i think probably the president karzai and others may take issue with some of the things that are said in this country, whether they are said in the executive branch, legislative branch commodore wherever.

we do understand that there's a political process that has emerged in afghanistan. that is a good thing. politicians in afghanistan and around the world sometimes will feel the need to say things of importance to their own population and that may cause us some discomfort, but he is the president of afghanistanh. e is a partner. we work very closely with him. he is a partner. the secretary had a constructive conversation with him last week. we will continue to work on our joint shared interests and work through issues as they occur. >> so you don't share mr. galbraith's opinion? >> note. he's the president of afghanistan. we are working closely with him

and respect him. we want to see the emergence of an effective government at the national level. we will continue to work with others in afghanistan on effective government at to the provincial and local level. >> does the secretary have a good relationship is with president karzai? >> they do. they went through various issues on friday. i think she feels very comfortable with the relationship she has with the president. >> has the president been advised not to use islamic radicalism? some are seeking to remove those terms. >> i am not aware of any specific directive. beyond that, what are you referring to?

>> there's a story that barack obama's advisor plans to remove terms such as islamic radicalism from a document outlining national security strategy. it says "insensitive, insightful terms" to steer away from. >> it is not reflective of the struggle we face. we do confront a global movement of terrorists, violent extremists. not all of them are islamic. i think it would be a mistake to say that this is about one part of a world or one community. we oppose people who employ violence for political purposes regardless of where they are. al qaeda is working hard to extend its network to all corners of the world, including

in the united states. i think terminology is important. but parts of our strategy going forward is to combat violent extremism in all of its forms. that will involve working closely with muslim communities around a world, but it will also involve working more broadly against any movement working with our partners around the world, that threatens democratic institutions. >> the political upheaval halfway around world, do you have any concerns or comments about this equation in thailand, a state of emergency that has been declared there? >> we respect the rights of freedom of expression, however, forcibly entering government buildings is not an appropriate means of protest. everyone has the right of

assembly and to protest peacefully. but we hope that differences can be resolved through democratic institutions and not through violence. >> can you explain why there's the difference in language to their on entering government buildings than there was some security staff? > -- with respect to kurdistan? >> i think i said almost the same thing with respect to kurdistan. >> how do you see the relationship between the croatian neighbors with the u.s.? >> i think we value dialogue in asia, but this is a matter between the governments of china and india. we certainly think that any mechanism that allows two important countries that our neighbors, it's vital important

that the economies should have appropriate mechanisms to communicate whatever they feel the need. >> next week you are having a nuclear security summit with countries coming here, , what role does in the a place? -- what role does india play? >> it will play an important role in national security summit next week as well as the npt review conference in may. we think that, as the nuclear posture review reflected on its release yesterday, we are less concerned about the exchange of nuclear weapons among states. we are more concern about how we keep nuclear technology and

know-how out of the hands of outsiders states and rogue elements. india will have an important role to play both in terms of reinforcing and strengthening of the non-proliferation treaty, but also demonstrating how it can both protect nuclear technology but also allowing the growth -- not allowing the growth of nuclear civilian capacity. >> is bocka and taliban an issue -- al qaeda and taliban? >> i'm not going to go further on that regarding pakistan. >> the north koreans convicted

an american of an unspecified crime, sentenced him to hard labor. have you been told about this? what was? he convicted was? >> there were representatives from the swedish embassy, which is are protecting power. they did attend the trial. we are aware of what has taken place. we continue to seek, through the swedish embassy, consular access to the american citizen. the the last time that was granted was march 17. >> do you have any information on what the offense was? >> beyond what the swedish have told us, i don't think we have any particular insight. we continue to believe that he should be granted amnesty and immediately released. >> what did the swedes tell you about the charges? >> we are familiar with the

basics of the trial. beyond that, we don't have anything. >> tell us what those are. >> i cannot go any further. we have been in touch with the swedes. they've told us what has transpired with in the trial. beyond that, i have no particular -- >> can you tell us why you cannot elaborate? >> the north koreans have details that he's been convicted of unspecified charges. i don't know that we have anybody diller insight beyond that. i will take the question as to whether we have any greater specificity about the charges. i don't have any thing regarding matt. >> could you confirm his name? >> we don't have that. >> the swedes beating in the courtroom, does that count as a

consular visit? >> they monitored the trial. they did not have any particular dialogue with the individual while the trial was taking place, to my knowledge. >> regarding the israelis and palestinians, there was an article today that said henner would be a peace plan to replace the approach of step-by-step. >> the holiday is over. we are in touch with the parties. we want to get them into negotiations as quickly as possible. as we have said many times. this is the only way agreements can be reached to end the conflict. as to the column today, we have said many times we are prepared

to play an active role once the parties get into negotiations. but beyond that, i have no particular comment. i would steer you away from the idea that we are going to try to impose a particular view on the parties. we ultimately believe that getting negotiations where they will address the core issues, we could help them, as we have done many times in past negotiations where we can offer ideas on how to bridge differences. we are prepared to do that. but our focus right now is getting them into proximity talks, into negotiations. and then we will see what happens after that. >> how is the effort to get them into proximity talks going? any contact? >> there has been contact. the back and forth continues.

we are looking still for the party's to indicate that they are prepared to take the steps we have outlined for both of them that can create the right atmosphere for proximity talks. >> does that include a meeting with mr. benjamin netanyahu and the special envoy? >> at this point i have nothing to project about the future. >> a strategic conference, when that is done at the u.s. that they should be given the same kind of deal like the u.s. and indian nuclear deal, were you told that they already had a deal with china when they were in washington? because they already had a deal with china. the pakistan-chinese nuclear deal? >> i don't know if this came up during our discussions.

we are focused on pakistan's energy needs. but as we said last week, right now that does not include civilian nuclear energy. >> let's talk about sudan. you said there are a number of developments. are they feeling more or less optimistic that the elections will produce credible results? >> i think we will wait to see. we do expect elections to begin next week. there have been difficulties. as we have said, the parties have legitimate grievances in terms of their access to media. there is -- this is the first election in sudan in 24 years. we know this is going to be difficult. we know that this is going to be hard for sudan to produce an

election that is comparable to a developed country like the united states. so we know they're going to be problems and challenges. we also recognize - >> we're going to take you live to prague in the czech republic where president barack obama and president medvedev are signing the nuclear arms reduction treaty. >> ladies and gentlemen, president of the united states, barack obama. and the president of the russian federation president medvedev, the treaty on measures for the production and limitation of strategic offensive arms.

>> [speaking in russian and then translated] the president of the united states of america barack obama. and the president of the russian federation, dmitri medvedev, are signing the treaty between the united states of america and the russian federation on measures for the further reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms and the protocol to it.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

[applause] [applause] >> good afternoon, everyone.

i am honored to be back in the czech republic with president medvedev and r chour czech host for this treaty. happy to be back in the beautiful city of prague. the czech republic is a close friend and ally of the united states. i have great admiration and affection for the czech people. their bond with the american people are deep and enduring. they have made great contributions to the united states over many decades, including in my hometown in chicago. i want to thank the president and all those involved in helping to host this extraordinary event. i want to thank my friend and partner dmitri medvedev. without his personal efforts and

strong leadership, we would not be here today. we have met and spoken by phone many times throughout the negotiations of this treaty and we have developed a very effective work relationship built on calendar, collaboration, and mutual respect. one year ago this week, i came here to prague and gave a speech outlining america's comprehensive commitment to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and seeking the ultimate goal of a world without them. i said then and i will repeat now, that this is a long-term goal, one that may not even be achieved in my lifetime. but i believed then and as i do now, that the pursuit of that goal will move us further beyond the cold war, strengthen the global nonproliferation regime, and make the united states and the world safer and more secure.

one of the steps that i called for last year was the realization of this treaty. so it is very gratifying to be back in prague today. i also came committed to reset relations between the united states and russia. i know that president medvedev shared that commitment. as he said in our first meeting in london, our relationship that started to drift, making it difficult to cooperate on issues of common interest. when the u.s. and russia are not able to work together if on big issues, it is not good for either of our nations, nor is it good for growth. together we have stopped that drift and? and the benefits of cooperation. today is an important milestone for nuclear security and nonproliferation and for u.s.- russia relations. if it fulfills our common objective to negotiate a new strategic arms reduction treaty. it includes a significant reduction in nuclear weapons

that we will deploy. it cuts our delivery vehicle by roughly half. it includes a comprehensive verification regime which allows us to further build trust. it enables both sides of the flexibility to protect our security as well as america's unwavering commitment to the security of our european allies. i look forward to working with the united states senate to achieve ratification for this important treaty later this year. finally, this day demonstrates the determination of the united states and russia and, the two nations holding over 90% of the world's nuclear weapons, to pursue responsible global leadership. together we are keeping our commitments under the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, which must be the foundation for global nonproliferation. the new start treaty is an important first step forward, it is just one step on a longer journey. as i said last year, this treaty

will set the stage for further cuts. going forward, we hope to pursue discussions with russia on reducing our strategic and tactical weapons, including non- deployed weapons. if president medvedev and i have agreed to expand discussions on missile defense. this will include regular exchanges of information about our threat assessments as well as the completion of a joint assessment of emerging ballistic missiles. if these assessments are completed -- at their completed, i laforce to launch an a dialogue about missile defense cooperation. but nuclear weapons are not simply an issue for the u.s. and russia. they threaten the common security of all nations. a nuclear weapon in the hands of a terrorist is a danger to people everywhere. from moscow to n.y., from the cities of europe to south asia. so next week 47 nations will come together in washington to discuss concrete steps that can be taken to secure all

vulnerable nuclear materials on the world in four years. and the spread of nuclear weapons to more states is also unacceptable to global security, raising the specter of arms races from the middle east to east asia. earlier this week the united states formally changed our policy to make it clear that those nuclear weapons states that are in compliance with the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and their nonproliferation obligations will not be threatened by america's nuclear arsenal. this demonstrates again america's commitment to the npt as a cornerstone of our security strategy. those nations that follow rules will find greater security and opportunity. those nations that refused to meet their obligations will be isolated and denied the opportunity that comes with international recognition. that includes accountability for those that break the rules.

otherwise, the npt is just words on page. that is why the united states and russia are part of a coalition of nations insisting that the islamic republic of iran says consequences because they have continued -- continually failed to meet their obligations. we are working together, the united nations security council, to pass strong sections -- sanctions on iran. we will not tolerate actions that followed the npt and threaten the international community and our collective and stability. while these issues are a top priority, they are only one part of the u.s.-russia relationship. today i express again my deepest condolences for the terrible loss of russian lives in the recent terrorist attacks. we will remain steadfast partners in combating violent extremism. we also discussed the potential to expand our cooperation on

behalf of economic growth, trade, and investment, as well as technological innovation. if i look for to discussing these issues further when president medvedev visits the united states later this year. because there's much we can do on behalf of our security and prosperity if we continue to work together. when you survey the many challenges we face around ", it is easy to grow complacent or to abandon the notion that progress can be shared -- many challenges we face around the world. when nations allow themselves to be defined by their differences, the gulf between them widens. when we fail to pepursue peace, its days beyond our grasp. prague is a monument to human progress. old adversaries can forge new

partnerships. i cannot be help but be struck the other day by the person who helped build the soviet union's first atom bomb at the age of 92. having lived to see the world war and the cold war. he said "we hope humanity will reach the moment when there is no need for nuclear weapons, when there is peace and calm in the world." it is easy to dismiss those voices. doing so risks repeating the horrors of the past and ignoring the history of human progress. the pursuit of peace and calm and cooperation among nations is the work of both leaders and peoples in the 21st century. we must be as persistent and passionate in our pursuit of progress as any who would stand in our way. once again, president medvedev, thank you for your extraordinary leadership. >> your welco are welcome.

[applause] ">> dear colleagues, dear members of the media, i fully agree with the assessment that has just been made by my colleague, president obama, concerning the fact that here in this room a truly historic event has taken place and the treaty has been signed for a further reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms. this treaty has a 10-year duration. it will supersede the start treaty which has expired as well as another existing crushes-u.s. treaty on reduction of strategic defense capabilities.

first of all, i'd like to thank my colleague, president of united states of america, for successful cooperation in this very complex matter and for the reasonable compromises that have been achieved thanks to the work of our two teams. the aborted a bank to them, but let me do it once again in the presence of the media and the public. we thank them for their excellent work. i would also like to thank the leadership of the czech republic, mr. president, you, for this beautiful city and this beautiful springtime, thereby creating a good atmosphere for the future. and i believe that the this signature will open new cooperation among our countries and will create safer conditions for life here and throughout the

world. the negotiating process has not been --, but we have been working in a constructive way that has been a lot of work and very often are teams worked 24 hours a day. that enabled us to do something that just a couple of months ago looked like a mission impossible. within a short amount of time and be prepared a full-fledged treaty and signed it. as a result we have a document that maintains the balance of interest of russia and the united states of america. what matters most is that this is a win-win situation. no one stands to lose from this agreement. i believe that this is typical of our cooperation. both parties have taken into account this victory of ours,

the entire world community has one. this treaty has strategic ability and at the same time enables us to rise to a higher level of cooperation between russia and the united states. also, the contents of the treaty -- let me point out once again what we have achieved, because this is very important, 1550 developed weapons, which is one-third below the current level. 700 deployed icbm 's. and heavy bombers. this represents more than two fold reduction below the current levels. deployed and non deplore launchers for such missiles as well as deployed and non deployed heavy weapons, which presents a two-thirds reduction below the level that existed

prior to this treaty. at the same time can use its own discretion to determine the makeup and structure of its strategic defense potential. the treaty also includes provisions concerning -- change. we are quite experienced in these two matters. experts on these matters, they have the greatest experts in the world. the treaty also includes provisions concerning conversion and elimination, inspection provisions, as well as confidence-building measures. the verification mechanism has been significant and simplify compared with the original start treaty. it insures proper verification, irreversibility, and transparency to reduce strategic offensive arms.

we believe and our american partners are aware of it, this is our open position, we believe that the treaty can be viable and can operate only provided there is no qualitative orix quantitative increase in -- or quantitative increase in capabilities. this is the gist of the statement made by the russian confederation in the signature. in the post-senator period, we will achieve the ratification of the treaty, as mentioned by my colleague, mr. president of the united states. if it is also important to synchronize the ratification process. in terms of proceeding quickly to present this document to the senate for ratification. we will also work with our

federal assembly to maintain the necessary dynamics of the ratification process. by and large, we are satisfied with the work done. the result we have obtained is good. but today of course we have discussed not only the fact of signing the treaty. we have also discussed a whole range of important key issues of concern to all the countries. of course we cannot omit the iranian nuclear program. regrettably, iran is not responding to many constructive proposals that have been made. we cannot turn a blind eye to this. therefore, i do not rule out the possibility that the security council of united nations will have to review this issue again. our position is well-known. let me briefly outline it now. of course sanctions by themselves seldom obtained specific results. although it is difficult to do

without them in certain situations. those sanctions should be smart and name not only at nonproliferation but also to resolve other issues. rather [unintelligible] [president speaking in russian]

this should not only be between the presidency, but presidents do not cover all the issues that have to be tackled by executive structures. on the working level, contact should be maintained on all levels. [president speaking in russian]

[applause] [applause] >> the chicago tribune, christie parsons.

[no audio] >> thank you very much. thank you for taking my question, mr. president. how will the two sides get around differences on missile defense to work out a fall on a treaty, since that seems to be the biggest problem, for their arsenal reductions? can you work out a cooperative agreement on missile defense? >> one of the things that we discussed when we first met in moscow was the relationship between offensive and defensive capabilities. and what i made clear was that

our missile defense systems were not directed at changing the strategic balance between the united states and russia, but instead were directed at protecting the american people from potentially new attacks from missiles launched from third countries. we recognize, however, that russia is a significant interest in this issue. and what we have committed to doing is engaging in a significant discussion, not only bilaterally, but also having discussions with our european allies and others about a framework in which we can potentially cooperate on issues of missile defense. in a way that